document in regards to swiss direct democracy

here it is!

Lots of reading. I will get back to you.

I know. My friend scanned it all for me just for this purpose!

I really wish I had the capacity to look at the pdf closely. I will try to read it eventually.

I think democracy in general, and organizational decision-making, needs to work immensely on stakeholder theory, perceptions and practices.

I get no single message from this document. It is interesting to get an overview of the situation in Switzerland.

It seems their system works well and is still working well. In my opinion, it seems the SVP (Swiss Peoples Party) have tried to take the roll as the direct democracy party. On the second page it implies that all political parties (not just left and greens) are using the initiative system for their intentions, particularly the SVP.

Then it talks about ecopop. Love the word and like that it represents the problem of over population. Interesting that the Greens oppose the ecopop initiative, saying they have no problem with the number of people but rather a per-capita problem. I see their point.

The Federal Council is an interesting concept. It is not elected by the people and the SVP pushed an initiative for it to be, and it failed. It seems the Swiss have confidence in the system as it is. There is another opinion that states Switzerland's very special form of democratic governance also requires political parties (who, as far as I can figure, elect the Federal Council's 7 members).

I see that the initiative system can form groups with specific interests. Not much different to our representative democracy except the special interest parties don't have much chance against the major parties.

"The fact that constitutional initiatives are easier to orchestrate and win than before in the new media democracy is explained by technological factors amongst others."

Talks about, in the near future, electronic voting being available at the persons discretion. They are warned about the possible short comings. That article seems to be missing a page?

And I love the idea of lowering the voting age to 16.

you are right, there was no single message,it was a good insight into a system thats trialing "citizen initiated referendum"

im not a fan of that system, but it may be a means of transition, however i feel a better transition to real direct democracy is SOL and the direct access to a representative to determine what they vote for.

Thanks for posting this Jay. And sorry if I missed a page...it was bits and pieces from different magazines over the last 12 or so months.

The system works, particularly at the shared leadership i.e. Federal Council level. I have written a blog about this: http://www.culturalinspirations.com.au/blog/fact-or-fiction-shared-leadership-in-politics
And the multi-party system allows for more diverse views and better representation of the interest of the population. I see our party duopoly as a problem for the future...it limits choice and the reflection of what people truly want from their representatives.

The things that don't work well are:
The voting population is a minority of the population. It is generally assumed that it is older people who vote.

Things that seem to be starting to happen and therefore are not linked to the system per se are:
The media is starting to play havoc in the system too. The SVP (the conservatives who have plenty of money) push the media barrel and have influenced decisions to the detriment of the country e.g. limiting the free movement of people is against the bilateral agreement with the EU, creating international and legal issues and making it difficult to actually legislate the decision.
Politicians are becoming increasingly professionals rather than community members. While this tended to be the norm for those who went for leading positions, many politicians did come from a community representation background and may stay for one or two terms only. Increasingly there is a political elite forming. (sound familiar to Australia).

Those who know how to play the game are stacking the board again.

It's why I don't trust retention of the politicians.

I think new communication tech empowered the common person briefly (occupy and the spring, leaks etc) but the channels of power have found new methods to drown the noise. The people and groups in power, across the globe, seem to have found a new footing in the tech era. Like all social systems, those with money can employ experts to create what they desire; but unlike other social technologies (Governance, Law, Finance) access to the understanding and use of Information Tech is not restricted to those who can afford the education.

I think there are capabilities of the information networks that have yet to be enabled. Soon, some group, like loomio, will create the fertile ground where a new media will be born. This media will not only exist in the virtual realm, it will plug into the houses of government. Democratic Media.

Democratic Government, I think, has always been intended as a method to distribute power but all it has achieved in the past is give the pseudo powerful a leg up into the power circle. Soon, with the use of a new democratic media, it will give all of us power.

My only concern is security.

As long as we use current infrastructure, we have all the current security risks.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/catalog-reveals-nsa-has-back-doors-for-numerous-devices-a-940994.html ( http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/catalog-reveals-nsa-has-back-doors-for-numerous-devices-a-940994.html )

The methods employed must be to the best of our ability, "secured"

Ive mentioned before that i believe in open source code and second internet.

How we operate direct democracy in the transition period will be a big question mark.